As some of you know I have been working this week on a new balance specifically Seton's, and here is the first beta version at last. It uses the BH balance mod V2 (pretty much 3650) as a base. All changes have been made with Seton's in mind and with best efforts to keep them solely on a mathematical basis relative to existing figures to keep the underlying game and feel the same.
My overall philosophy for this balance is for every unit and upgrade to have a valid and intuitive purpose rather than be left on the sidelines. Why have I bothered to do this? Many units that have been part of the game for years seem neglected while the main balance apparently goes around in circles, making new changes before old problems are fixed. This mod aims, at least for Seton's, to fix many problems that have caused certain features and units to be irrelevant at high level. I mainly made it for myself, so I will not try to make anyone play it, only if they wish.
I have a vision of the meta of Seton's playing across 5 "phases" that I have tried to create with this balance, in which the game could end at any moment during them:
1) Minute 0-10 "pre-asf" where any crazy rush strategy is possible.
2) Minute 11-20 "mid game strategies" where T4 rush or navy rush etc might come into play.
3) Minute 21-30 "eco late game navy fights" if game is still progressing at this point, it is likely to fall into an eco-fest t3 navy fight on a large scale.
4) Minute 31-40 "invasion stage" at this point the navy fights should be almost over, and there is a window for t4/t3 land/air invasions to take place of the final surviving bases.
5) Minute 41+ "game ender stage", as the name suggests where game enders can start coming into play if the game is so even no one has won yet.
Currently 3), 4), and 5) all blur into a single 5 minute period or so around minute 30 in general, which I think ruins many potentially enjoyable game elements. I wish to break this pattern by pushing back game enders to only being viable at a later stage with a more developed economy and boosting the strength of alternative counters.
Upcoming ideas and changes:
Spoiler: show
-scathis- EMP impacts air units too? big EMP explosion on death for coolness?
-novax- be able to see stealth/nuke subs in sea + -5000e or so drain?
-t2 bombers (not sure if changes to t2 bombers like janus need to be applied in this mod)
-shields (ED5 cybran shields especially)
-wagner -> torp defence? role change from raiding to amphibious assault tank?
-HARMS -> wait for coming patch
-t1 bombers -> currently new balance but not final yet
-risk of nuke spam potential?
-scu upgrades? (esp. combat ones)
-other forgotten good balance changes between 3650->now?
-tele marker
-update descriptions
-buff resto?
-novax- be able to see stealth/nuke subs in sea + -5000e or so drain?
-t2 bombers (not sure if changes to t2 bombers like janus need to be applied in this mod)
-shields (ED5 cybran shields especially)
-wagner -> torp defence? role change from raiding to amphibious assault tank?
-HARMS -> wait for coming patch
-t1 bombers -> currently new balance but not final yet
-risk of nuke spam potential?
-scu upgrades? (esp. combat ones)
-other forgotten good balance changes between 3650->now?
-tele marker
-update descriptions
-buff resto?
Change log:
Version 1 (released):
Spoiler: show
Economy:
T3 mass fabricator: 3000->1500m, 65000e unchanged, +12m/-3500e -> +16m,/-3000e, build time reduced to 4500 from 4988 to reduce t2 mass fab advantage under construction (since they generate +1 mass per 100 spent). The purpose is for t2 mass fabs to be made around mass extractors with 2 storage adjacent in mid game, and t3 mass fabs to take efficiency priority late game after all mexes t3. This unit was previously irrelevant after nerfs to adjacency, and makes no sense at all.
Energy storage: death explosion 1000 -> 700 (just a small change, still enough to kill t1 pgen, but less punishing for adjacency on higher tech power in later game stages)
Build power re-balance (reference point t1 engineer):
T2 engi +5% cost inefficiency, t3 engi +10% cost inefficiency, (scu +15%?) hive +25% cost inefficiency kennel +50% cost inefficiency. Other stats same as current balance.
T2 engi: 136m/680e
T3 engi: 343m/1715e
Kennel t2/t3: 390m/1950e
Hive 1/2/3: 325m/1625e
There are arguments either side for whether build power at all tech levels should have the same efficiency, and I have tried to reach a compromise with only small increments of inefficiency with tech. In current balance however engineering stations have been ignored in this re-balance, and I have addressed this in mine. Kennel has addition inefficiency in line with what it previously had, the rationale being that "drones are better".
T3 AA re-balance:
T3 sam all factions: Splash 1.5 -> 0.5, damage x 0.9 (in line with aeon carrier)
T3 maa all factions: Splash 1.5 -> 0, damage x 1.5 (giving them extra damage for splash sacrifice, it makes no sense for them to have splash when carrier/cruiser do not. This change is for consistency across land and sea. weaker vs mass equivalent flak vs gunships, but stronger vs asf, strats and other t3 air -> mix flak + t3maa for best results, in particular useful vs early single strats or asf), range now equivalent to sam (60)
Aeon: damage per shot *0.25, shots per second 1 per 6 sec -> 4 per 6 sec (in line with other aeon zealot AA, none is so slow wtf)
UEF salvo recharge time 4.5 -> 4.0, as tests showed it was less effective (other factions almost equal)
I wanted to make late game t3 and t4 air more relevant, without damaging the t3 AA's ability to counter early strat rushes and air problems. By reducing the splash of sam, fighting air above them should be less punishing, and strats should have a better chance when grouped together in larger numbers.
T3 Land:
Titan range: 20 -> 24 (1 less than loyalist)
Othuum range of indirect fire gun 32->35 (in line with brick/percy)
T3 mobile arty +10% damage all factions as the DPS wasn't really useful for the cost vs other choices.
Titans (currently useless pieces of crap) cost the same as loyalist, and this change makes them much closer in ability. Many people feel othuum is weaker, and they are rarely made in setons mid while other faction's t3 is. This is just a small buff to allow a faster engage. T3 mobile arty is rarely effective in mid from experience, and this buff makes them more comparable to sniper bots and T3 MML in terms of damage ability.
Hover:
blaze 4.3 movement speed land, 3.87 water
Aeon t2 flak: 2.6 land, 3.87 water
Riptide 3.7 land, 3.33 water
Sera t2 hover tank: 4.3 land, 3.87 water
Sera t2 flak: 2.5 land, 3.87 water
This is quite reflective of current balance, however I had to change older 3650 values.
T4:
Atlantis: 12000m/150,000e -> 8000m/100,000e (more in line with normal carriers... it is a T4 and meant to be better...) elevation -3.6 -> -3.9 (maximum possible before battleship ground fire stops working). Vet from 30 -> 32 per level in line with carriers. Splash 1.5 -> 1, DPS 280->300 (like czar, and in line with general sam splash decreases, damage up in line with sam)
Purpose of this was to make Altantis more comparable to existing carriers, and as a potential t2 stage navy rush unit, and a much more common fleet support unit into late game. Before it was garbage. Utter garbage.
Mavor/Yolona: 1.4x cost + build time
Para: 1.5x cost + build time
Cost and time increases for the main game enders to discourage reclaiming navy into them. Idea is later, and single game ender minute 40+, and once you make it you support with other units/strategies rather than making more... for example mavor + normal nukes or yolona + sniping smd... more for para since it is the only one that can allow more and more game enders being made
Ythotha: same changes as current balance as I thought they were fair.
Czar: 45000m/731250e -> 40000m/1,500,000e (roughly 1/3 of e ratio of ASF due to efficiency of pgens, but need e more expensive so not everyone can easily build it beyond air player since it is for air control.
HP 58000->50000
Speed 8->4
Beam-> 3330 DPS -> 1110
AA missile: 300->400 damage per shot, splash 0 -> 1, range 64 -> 100, fire rate 1/1.25sec -> 1 per sec
Depth charge: 150 -> 350 damage per shot
Flak: range 44-> 50, muzzle velocity 20->30, damage radius 3->4
Regen -> in line with ahwassa
Vet -> in line with ahwssa
asf armour vs czar beam -> 0.8
czar armour vs asf -> 0.35
AA changes are in line with carrier/cruiser/flak
Depth charge in line with destroyer.
This is one of the most radical changes I made, a complete redesign of the czar from being a T4 mercy to an actually useful aircraft carrier support unit used for localised air control. Weaker hp and slower so more vunerable to normal aa, but asf are weaker vs them with special armour. The aim is for a czar to be "worth" about 100 asf, although this varies with micro and situations. In general from testing, mass for mass, czar + asf vs only asf allows for a good defensive micro position to get an advantage potentially. Pretty much denies use of torp etc until it is killed. Would expect main role to be navy support or late game defence, but still possibility to use it as giant mercy of death, however the slower speed, reduced laser damage and lower HP reduces that viability. Due to high energy costs it is unlikely to be an option until after minute 25.
T3 Arty:
T3 arty: All factions: Cost + build time x1.3
Aeon: accuracy from 0.35-> 0.4, range 900->800, damage per shot 6000 -> 5800, DPS 600 -> 580
Cybran: accuracy from 0.75 -> 0.7, damage per shot 4600 -> 4000,rate of fire 1 per 10 sec -> 1 per 8 sec, DPS 460-> 500
Sera: accuracy from 0.675 -> 0.55, range 825 -> 775, damage per shot 5000 -> 6240, rate of fire 1 per 10 sec -> 1 per 12 sec, DPS 500 -> 520,
UEF: accuracy from 0.525 -> 0.475, range from 750 -> 725, damage per shot -> 5500 -> 8960, rate of fire 1 per 10 sec -> 1 per 16 sec, DPS 550 -> 560
Accuracy vs splash normalised.
T3 arty was starting to become more and more common in high level Seton's, especially the dreaded Aeon emissary. I have now increased cost in line with the motivation to slow down game enders, and really nicely (I think) normalised range, damage and accuracy across the factions, while still having some nice diversity in style. UEF tries to emulate Mavor, while Cybran emulates scathis in terms of fire rates and raw damage. Now only T3 arty made in mid can reach the whole map, meaning you have to have won both navy for T3 arty to win the game alone. Salvation is unchanged, it is worth about 2x emissary in cost, and while it has infinite range, it can be defended to about the same extent as a single t3 arty. It is most likely to retain its role as the unit to build *after* a paragon, rather than before.
ACU Upgrades:
One of the biggest areas of change is for the ACUs, I have tried to make all upgrades "equally" useful and viable rather than 50% of them being unused unless trolling.
RAS:
Cybran 12m/3600e x0.8 -> 2880
UEF 14m/3300e x0.8 -> 2640
Sera 16m/3000e x0.7 -> 2100
Aeon 18m/2700e x0.7 -> 1890
I first normalised the old ras values (cybran was 3500 when it should have been 3600 in the correct ratio), then applied as an energy nerf 80% of cybran and UEF, 70% of Aeon/Sera. Currently this is an arbitrary -800e for cybran and UEF, -1000e for aeon and sera, which does not reflect the relationship of mass:e of the different ras, ignoring faction diversity. I have corrected this. Current balance costs and build times apply. Benefit still places t3 pgen build as superior on air, however it is closer than it was with about an extra mass fab worth of e for all factions.
Aeon first shield similar move to current balance:
1000m/35000e -> 750m/50000e (between 1/2 old aeon first shield and 1/2 current UEF), 8000hp -> 14000hp, recharge time 66->120 (as lower recharge time was the biggest strength of the current upgrade), regen 30->20, build time 1000-> 1200
I felt that while the shield was nice for early stages of the game, it was much less effective against raw damage snipe attempts much more common on Seton's. So I made this compromise.
Aeon second shield powerful late game strength:
4500m/1,000,000e -> 5000m/1,000,000e, 44000hp -> 50000hp, regen 44->50, build time 3500 -> 5600
Build time is in line with many other late game acu upgrades. Small buff given the options for the other factions late game.
Chrono:
1750/52500 -> 1200/42000 (like sera nano), 1225 -> 1200 build time.
I wanted to make chrono a closer choice along with the shield upgrade, a trade-off between more easily getting sniped and a stronger push.
Sensor system: same as current
UEF drone more expensive, more BP, sparky tech:
2x 500m/15000e drone upgrades with 40 bp (slightly less mass effective than t2 engi), with sparky tech, 1200 build time
100/5000 rebuild over 25 seconds
100 hp for some durability against light aa.
Efficient build power that you can get as an alternative to shield earlier on as beach or rock or even air. Also if you are rock or beach, and your mid is being crushed you can rush a drone to mid instead of acu. Also good for tmd constructions. But while it can be rushed, it cannot be abused to advance eco to t2 because of sparky tech, and also with 2:00 build time there is little chance of it being seen rushed in mid as first upgrade.
UEF Nano: 800/24000 -> 5000/500,000, build time 800 -> 5600, health 2000->20000, regen 40->100/s (more expensive than sera second nano for less benefit, same mass:e ratio)
Wanted nano to be a late game alternative to t3 acu for survivability. Making it close to t2 usually results t2 being chosen every time on Seton's.
UEF Billy, cost is now 4x tml upgrade, 10x tml missile. It can be countered with tmd so...
5400m/315000e -> 6000m/200000e, missile cost -> 1800m/36000e. Can be valid to get after ras.
UEF Bubble shield: Cost is really high relative to scu, 3000m/450000e -> 2500m/250,000e scaled similar to scu. Build time 2800->5600 like billy and nano.
Sera first resto field: 600m/4500e -> 400m/4000e
Idea is to make the choice even in mid between gun and resto much closer. It could be used in many defensive situations as a quick upgrade to get in place of a t2 pd.
Sera rapid restoration field: 1500m/31250e -> 3000m/63000e, radius 30->45 (twice price, 1.5x radius)
Radius expanded to see it being used in combination with navy more frequently. Would be strong for defending rushes, or even mid-late game navy battles (with a risk!)
Sera refracting amplifier 3500m/300000e -> 1750m/37500e, damage 400->100 (rationale: 1/2 mass, 1/8 e), build time 4200-> 1200 (like nano)
Wanted to give sera a similar option to aeon's double gun, perhaps as an alternative choice to t2 for those who had decided to go gun first.
Sera first nano -> same as current balance
Sera probably now has one of the most flexible early-mid game combat acu, however their survivability late game is now arguably the weakest even with double nano.
Cybran stealth 350/5250 -> 800/12000 (like gun but 50% e, since it has e drain too) new hp +3000 build time 500-> 800 (like gun)
The aim was to give Cybran a better option for a t2 stage combat acu, as the health was really a limiting factor for mid pushes. Also good for combination with torp in the sea.
General:
T1 wall for all factions: 4000 -> 3000 hp, 10->20 build time
This change in current balance was good, however I am not having the arbitrary factional hp differences here. Not on my watch.
Beetle: 300m/1800e -> 200m/1200e, 1200 -> 800 build time
Damage 3500 -> 3000.
After the nerfs to beetle it is rarely used, in this way you can get more beetles the for the same price you used to, or use the same amount at lower risk to eco upon failure.
3000 is about right given cost reduction, and considering hp of t2 mexes.
Aeon T1 AA boat: 120m/1200e -> 400m/3600e, 35 dps -> 140 dps, build time 800 -> 2400, HP 750->850, basically 1/5 of aeon cruiser but less range/intel and slightly less dps overall, but slightly more HP. Usually dies to 1 torp, but also kills that torp, with a slightly worse mass inefficiency than a cruiser. Designed to make 1-2 with a navy rush to stop aeon being useless vs any air whatsoever at early stages, and avoid need to invest all the way into a cruiser. Requires micro for maximum effectiveness. Was previously unused due to the pitiful damage output.
T3 mass fabricator: 3000->1500m, 65000e unchanged, +12m/-3500e -> +16m,/-3000e, build time reduced to 4500 from 4988 to reduce t2 mass fab advantage under construction (since they generate +1 mass per 100 spent). The purpose is for t2 mass fabs to be made around mass extractors with 2 storage adjacent in mid game, and t3 mass fabs to take efficiency priority late game after all mexes t3. This unit was previously irrelevant after nerfs to adjacency, and makes no sense at all.
Energy storage: death explosion 1000 -> 700 (just a small change, still enough to kill t1 pgen, but less punishing for adjacency on higher tech power in later game stages)
Build power re-balance (reference point t1 engineer):
T2 engi +5% cost inefficiency, t3 engi +10% cost inefficiency, (scu +15%?) hive +25% cost inefficiency kennel +50% cost inefficiency. Other stats same as current balance.
T2 engi: 136m/680e
T3 engi: 343m/1715e
Kennel t2/t3: 390m/1950e
Hive 1/2/3: 325m/1625e
There are arguments either side for whether build power at all tech levels should have the same efficiency, and I have tried to reach a compromise with only small increments of inefficiency with tech. In current balance however engineering stations have been ignored in this re-balance, and I have addressed this in mine. Kennel has addition inefficiency in line with what it previously had, the rationale being that "drones are better".
T3 AA re-balance:
T3 sam all factions: Splash 1.5 -> 0.5, damage x 0.9 (in line with aeon carrier)
T3 maa all factions: Splash 1.5 -> 0, damage x 1.5 (giving them extra damage for splash sacrifice, it makes no sense for them to have splash when carrier/cruiser do not. This change is for consistency across land and sea. weaker vs mass equivalent flak vs gunships, but stronger vs asf, strats and other t3 air -> mix flak + t3maa for best results, in particular useful vs early single strats or asf), range now equivalent to sam (60)
Aeon: damage per shot *0.25, shots per second 1 per 6 sec -> 4 per 6 sec (in line with other aeon zealot AA, none is so slow wtf)
UEF salvo recharge time 4.5 -> 4.0, as tests showed it was less effective (other factions almost equal)
I wanted to make late game t3 and t4 air more relevant, without damaging the t3 AA's ability to counter early strat rushes and air problems. By reducing the splash of sam, fighting air above them should be less punishing, and strats should have a better chance when grouped together in larger numbers.
T3 Land:
Titan range: 20 -> 24 (1 less than loyalist)
Othuum range of indirect fire gun 32->35 (in line with brick/percy)
T3 mobile arty +10% damage all factions as the DPS wasn't really useful for the cost vs other choices.
Titans (currently useless pieces of crap) cost the same as loyalist, and this change makes them much closer in ability. Many people feel othuum is weaker, and they are rarely made in setons mid while other faction's t3 is. This is just a small buff to allow a faster engage. T3 mobile arty is rarely effective in mid from experience, and this buff makes them more comparable to sniper bots and T3 MML in terms of damage ability.
Hover:
blaze 4.3 movement speed land, 3.87 water
Aeon t2 flak: 2.6 land, 3.87 water
Riptide 3.7 land, 3.33 water
Sera t2 hover tank: 4.3 land, 3.87 water
Sera t2 flak: 2.5 land, 3.87 water
This is quite reflective of current balance, however I had to change older 3650 values.
T4:
Atlantis: 12000m/150,000e -> 8000m/100,000e (more in line with normal carriers... it is a T4 and meant to be better...) elevation -3.6 -> -3.9 (maximum possible before battleship ground fire stops working). Vet from 30 -> 32 per level in line with carriers. Splash 1.5 -> 1, DPS 280->300 (like czar, and in line with general sam splash decreases, damage up in line with sam)
Purpose of this was to make Altantis more comparable to existing carriers, and as a potential t2 stage navy rush unit, and a much more common fleet support unit into late game. Before it was garbage. Utter garbage.
Mavor/Yolona: 1.4x cost + build time
Para: 1.5x cost + build time
Cost and time increases for the main game enders to discourage reclaiming navy into them. Idea is later, and single game ender minute 40+, and once you make it you support with other units/strategies rather than making more... for example mavor + normal nukes or yolona + sniping smd... more for para since it is the only one that can allow more and more game enders being made
Ythotha: same changes as current balance as I thought they were fair.
Czar: 45000m/731250e -> 40000m/1,500,000e (roughly 1/3 of e ratio of ASF due to efficiency of pgens, but need e more expensive so not everyone can easily build it beyond air player since it is for air control.
HP 58000->50000
Speed 8->4
Beam-> 3330 DPS -> 1110
AA missile: 300->400 damage per shot, splash 0 -> 1, range 64 -> 100, fire rate 1/1.25sec -> 1 per sec
Depth charge: 150 -> 350 damage per shot
Flak: range 44-> 50, muzzle velocity 20->30, damage radius 3->4
Regen -> in line with ahwassa
Vet -> in line with ahwssa
asf armour vs czar beam -> 0.8
czar armour vs asf -> 0.35
AA changes are in line with carrier/cruiser/flak
Depth charge in line with destroyer.
This is one of the most radical changes I made, a complete redesign of the czar from being a T4 mercy to an actually useful aircraft carrier support unit used for localised air control. Weaker hp and slower so more vunerable to normal aa, but asf are weaker vs them with special armour. The aim is for a czar to be "worth" about 100 asf, although this varies with micro and situations. In general from testing, mass for mass, czar + asf vs only asf allows for a good defensive micro position to get an advantage potentially. Pretty much denies use of torp etc until it is killed. Would expect main role to be navy support or late game defence, but still possibility to use it as giant mercy of death, however the slower speed, reduced laser damage and lower HP reduces that viability. Due to high energy costs it is unlikely to be an option until after minute 25.
T3 Arty:
T3 arty: All factions: Cost + build time x1.3
Aeon: accuracy from 0.35-> 0.4, range 900->800, damage per shot 6000 -> 5800, DPS 600 -> 580
Cybran: accuracy from 0.75 -> 0.7, damage per shot 4600 -> 4000,rate of fire 1 per 10 sec -> 1 per 8 sec, DPS 460-> 500
Sera: accuracy from 0.675 -> 0.55, range 825 -> 775, damage per shot 5000 -> 6240, rate of fire 1 per 10 sec -> 1 per 12 sec, DPS 500 -> 520,
UEF: accuracy from 0.525 -> 0.475, range from 750 -> 725, damage per shot -> 5500 -> 8960, rate of fire 1 per 10 sec -> 1 per 16 sec, DPS 550 -> 560
Accuracy vs splash normalised.
T3 arty was starting to become more and more common in high level Seton's, especially the dreaded Aeon emissary. I have now increased cost in line with the motivation to slow down game enders, and really nicely (I think) normalised range, damage and accuracy across the factions, while still having some nice diversity in style. UEF tries to emulate Mavor, while Cybran emulates scathis in terms of fire rates and raw damage. Now only T3 arty made in mid can reach the whole map, meaning you have to have won both navy for T3 arty to win the game alone. Salvation is unchanged, it is worth about 2x emissary in cost, and while it has infinite range, it can be defended to about the same extent as a single t3 arty. It is most likely to retain its role as the unit to build *after* a paragon, rather than before.
ACU Upgrades:
One of the biggest areas of change is for the ACUs, I have tried to make all upgrades "equally" useful and viable rather than 50% of them being unused unless trolling.
RAS:
Cybran 12m/3600e x0.8 -> 2880
UEF 14m/3300e x0.8 -> 2640
Sera 16m/3000e x0.7 -> 2100
Aeon 18m/2700e x0.7 -> 1890
I first normalised the old ras values (cybran was 3500 when it should have been 3600 in the correct ratio), then applied as an energy nerf 80% of cybran and UEF, 70% of Aeon/Sera. Currently this is an arbitrary -800e for cybran and UEF, -1000e for aeon and sera, which does not reflect the relationship of mass:e of the different ras, ignoring faction diversity. I have corrected this. Current balance costs and build times apply. Benefit still places t3 pgen build as superior on air, however it is closer than it was with about an extra mass fab worth of e for all factions.
Aeon first shield similar move to current balance:
1000m/35000e -> 750m/50000e (between 1/2 old aeon first shield and 1/2 current UEF), 8000hp -> 14000hp, recharge time 66->120 (as lower recharge time was the biggest strength of the current upgrade), regen 30->20, build time 1000-> 1200
I felt that while the shield was nice for early stages of the game, it was much less effective against raw damage snipe attempts much more common on Seton's. So I made this compromise.
Aeon second shield powerful late game strength:
4500m/1,000,000e -> 5000m/1,000,000e, 44000hp -> 50000hp, regen 44->50, build time 3500 -> 5600
Build time is in line with many other late game acu upgrades. Small buff given the options for the other factions late game.
Chrono:
1750/52500 -> 1200/42000 (like sera nano), 1225 -> 1200 build time.
I wanted to make chrono a closer choice along with the shield upgrade, a trade-off between more easily getting sniped and a stronger push.
Sensor system: same as current
UEF drone more expensive, more BP, sparky tech:
2x 500m/15000e drone upgrades with 40 bp (slightly less mass effective than t2 engi), with sparky tech, 1200 build time
100/5000 rebuild over 25 seconds
100 hp for some durability against light aa.
Efficient build power that you can get as an alternative to shield earlier on as beach or rock or even air. Also if you are rock or beach, and your mid is being crushed you can rush a drone to mid instead of acu. Also good for tmd constructions. But while it can be rushed, it cannot be abused to advance eco to t2 because of sparky tech, and also with 2:00 build time there is little chance of it being seen rushed in mid as first upgrade.
UEF Nano: 800/24000 -> 5000/500,000, build time 800 -> 5600, health 2000->20000, regen 40->100/s (more expensive than sera second nano for less benefit, same mass:e ratio)
Wanted nano to be a late game alternative to t3 acu for survivability. Making it close to t2 usually results t2 being chosen every time on Seton's.
UEF Billy, cost is now 4x tml upgrade, 10x tml missile. It can be countered with tmd so...
5400m/315000e -> 6000m/200000e, missile cost -> 1800m/36000e. Can be valid to get after ras.
UEF Bubble shield: Cost is really high relative to scu, 3000m/450000e -> 2500m/250,000e scaled similar to scu. Build time 2800->5600 like billy and nano.
Sera first resto field: 600m/4500e -> 400m/4000e
Idea is to make the choice even in mid between gun and resto much closer. It could be used in many defensive situations as a quick upgrade to get in place of a t2 pd.
Sera rapid restoration field: 1500m/31250e -> 3000m/63000e, radius 30->45 (twice price, 1.5x radius)
Radius expanded to see it being used in combination with navy more frequently. Would be strong for defending rushes, or even mid-late game navy battles (with a risk!)
Sera refracting amplifier 3500m/300000e -> 1750m/37500e, damage 400->100 (rationale: 1/2 mass, 1/8 e), build time 4200-> 1200 (like nano)
Wanted to give sera a similar option to aeon's double gun, perhaps as an alternative choice to t2 for those who had decided to go gun first.
Sera first nano -> same as current balance
Sera probably now has one of the most flexible early-mid game combat acu, however their survivability late game is now arguably the weakest even with double nano.
Cybran stealth 350/5250 -> 800/12000 (like gun but 50% e, since it has e drain too) new hp +3000 build time 500-> 800 (like gun)
The aim was to give Cybran a better option for a t2 stage combat acu, as the health was really a limiting factor for mid pushes. Also good for combination with torp in the sea.
General:
T1 wall for all factions: 4000 -> 3000 hp, 10->20 build time
This change in current balance was good, however I am not having the arbitrary factional hp differences here. Not on my watch.
Beetle: 300m/1800e -> 200m/1200e, 1200 -> 800 build time
Damage 3500 -> 3000.
After the nerfs to beetle it is rarely used, in this way you can get more beetles the for the same price you used to, or use the same amount at lower risk to eco upon failure.
3000 is about right given cost reduction, and considering hp of t2 mexes.
Aeon T1 AA boat: 120m/1200e -> 400m/3600e, 35 dps -> 140 dps, build time 800 -> 2400, HP 750->850, basically 1/5 of aeon cruiser but less range/intel and slightly less dps overall, but slightly more HP. Usually dies to 1 torp, but also kills that torp, with a slightly worse mass inefficiency than a cruiser. Designed to make 1-2 with a navy rush to stop aeon being useless vs any air whatsoever at early stages, and avoid need to invest all the way into a cruiser. Requires micro for maximum effectiveness. Was previously unused due to the pitiful damage output.
Version 1.1 (released):
Spoiler: show
T4:
Sat (structure): 28000m/400000e -> 22000m/1,100,000e,
Sat: damage * 0.3, vision radius 40 -> 200, omni/radar radius 70->200, 800m/8000e -> 8000m/80000e (bigger reward if you kill it, but low enough you could not abuse sat for free mass easily), build time 400 -> 4000
General:
Wagner: hp from 1450->2900, damage * 0.5, torp from 6->5 damage.
Sat (structure): 28000m/400000e -> 22000m/1,100,000e,
Sat: damage * 0.3, vision radius 40 -> 200, omni/radar radius 70->200, 800m/8000e -> 8000m/80000e (bigger reward if you kill it, but low enough you could not abuse sat for free mass easily), build time 400 -> 4000
General:
Wagner: hp from 1450->2900, damage * 0.5, torp from 6->5 damage.
Version 1.2 (released):
Spoiler: show
T4:
Sat: damage from *0.3 -> *0.25 as the intel has proven to be very powerful, the damage should be as close to a light tickle as possible.
Czar: After feedback and experience from real games, some buffs were deemed necessary to the initial design in terms of durability and movement speed to better fulfill the role intended.
Movement speed 4->6, armour vs asf 0.35->0.25.
Scathis: 110,000m/2,000,000e -> 150,000m/3,000,000, (50% of old scathis value), veterancy from 50 per level, to 25 per level (since now much lower damage).
Damage from 3000 per shot to 100 per shot. Radius from 7->25. EMP radius impacting all ground units 0->50. Stun duration 1.5 seconds. Range 300-> 900
(like old emissary, this is to force you to place it on rock or beach at least, so it cannot be so easily protected as at the back of air base.) e drain from -2000 -> -5000
Scathis is now redesigned as a "game ender" support unit, for a much lower cost of mavor/yolona/para, it allows you to support a T4 land push to great effect from range.
Tempest: elevation from -5 -> -5.8 (to avoid all battleship ground fire, highest possible before it can be ground fired, other tempest and ground fire strat still can however)
Currently Tempest is not a mass efficient unit, and this small change should give it much greater flexibility and durability in the t3 navy wars it is most often found in.
Sat: damage from *0.3 -> *0.25 as the intel has proven to be very powerful, the damage should be as close to a light tickle as possible.
Czar: After feedback and experience from real games, some buffs were deemed necessary to the initial design in terms of durability and movement speed to better fulfill the role intended.
Movement speed 4->6, armour vs asf 0.35->0.25.
Scathis: 110,000m/2,000,000e -> 150,000m/3,000,000, (50% of old scathis value), veterancy from 50 per level, to 25 per level (since now much lower damage).
Damage from 3000 per shot to 100 per shot. Radius from 7->25. EMP radius impacting all ground units 0->50. Stun duration 1.5 seconds. Range 300-> 900
(like old emissary, this is to force you to place it on rock or beach at least, so it cannot be so easily protected as at the back of air base.) e drain from -2000 -> -5000
Scathis is now redesigned as a "game ender" support unit, for a much lower cost of mavor/yolona/para, it allows you to support a T4 land push to great effect from range.
Tempest: elevation from -5 -> -5.8 (to avoid all battleship ground fire, highest possible before it can be ground fired, other tempest and ground fire strat still can however)
Currently Tempest is not a mass efficient unit, and this small change should give it much greater flexibility and durability in the t3 navy wars it is most often found in.
Version 2 (released):
Spoiler: show
Tweaks to existing changes:
Scathis : 150000m/3,000,000e -> 200000m/4,000,000e, build time 50,000 -> 66,666, e cost per shot 5000 -> 10,000 (costs more in line with aeon scatter arty, from game experience it appears too good for the cost)
aeon t1 aa boat: build time 2400 -> 1600 (more in line with other t1 tech, makes it easier to rush if needed)
Cybran navy:
T3 Sonar: currently the stealth radius is confusing. Stealth radius vs sonar 90-> 50, radius vs radar 45-> 50 (compromise for same radius to avoid confusion of the stealth range in line with the rest of the game, two rings sadly isn't possible).
T2 Stealth boat: hp 1500-> 3000hp (since torpedo bomber changes, they have lost a lot of utility for fleet defence, extra HP (as per cruiser) will give them extra survivability in return for this loss)
Scathis : 150000m/3,000,000e -> 200000m/4,000,000e, build time 50,000 -> 66,666, e cost per shot 5000 -> 10,000 (costs more in line with aeon scatter arty, from game experience it appears too good for the cost)
aeon t1 aa boat: build time 2400 -> 1600 (more in line with other t1 tech, makes it easier to rush if needed)
Cybran navy:
T3 Sonar: currently the stealth radius is confusing. Stealth radius vs sonar 90-> 50, radius vs radar 45-> 50 (compromise for same radius to avoid confusion of the stealth range in line with the rest of the game, two rings sadly isn't possible).
T2 Stealth boat: hp 1500-> 3000hp (since torpedo bomber changes, they have lost a lot of utility for fleet defence, extra HP (as per cruiser) will give them extra survivability in return for this loss)
Version 3 (released):
Spoiler: show
Tweaks to existing changes:
T2 mass fabs = 25% adjacency of a t1 mex
T3 mass fabs = 150% adjacency of a t2 mex (this means 20% -> 15% adjacency on t3 factories, and a bit boosted on other structures like quantum gateway)
T3 pgen = 18.75% adjacency bonus (scu barely draw much energy anyway, no idea why it was reduced to only 5% compared to the huge gains you can get on an air factory).
These values were previously inconsistent with mexes in a few cases.
asf armour vs czar beam: 0.8 -> 0.25 (it was still doing too much damage, this seems a more reasonable amount... however don't expect to kill czars in a single pass unless you have 200+ asf, they are designed to survive for a while in long engagements)
sam splash 0.5 -> 1
t3maa splash 0 -> 0.5
(from further testing, this makes all the sam perform similarly, and rarely miss like they were doing with reduced splash)
T2 mass fabs = 25% adjacency of a t1 mex
T3 mass fabs = 150% adjacency of a t2 mex (this means 20% -> 15% adjacency on t3 factories, and a bit boosted on other structures like quantum gateway)
T3 pgen = 18.75% adjacency bonus (scu barely draw much energy anyway, no idea why it was reduced to only 5% compared to the huge gains you can get on an air factory).
These values were previously inconsistent with mexes in a few cases.
asf armour vs czar beam: 0.8 -> 0.25 (it was still doing too much damage, this seems a more reasonable amount... however don't expect to kill czars in a single pass unless you have 200+ asf, they are designed to survive for a while in long engagements)
sam splash 0.5 -> 1
t3maa splash 0 -> 0.5
(from further testing, this makes all the sam perform similarly, and rarely miss like they were doing with reduced splash)
FAQs:
Spoiler: show
Q: What?!? Another balance direction? How dare you risk splitting the community further?!
A: If you don't play Seton's this doesn't apply to you, and you wasted your own time reading this, good job.
Q: How did you decide these changes?
A: All changes are from my years of Seton's experience and changing balance dynamics, so I generally know which aspects of the balance have worked best. My philosophy is that everything that has changed has clear rationale and to be intuitive. I want fluid, dynamic gameplay with multiple potential strategies at all stages of the game.
Q: What is the purpose of this mod?
A: To reach peak Seton's gameplay and address many clear issues that have been ignored for years that I got bored of not being fixed.
Q: Wtf gala, this is shit balance for playing *insert generic team map*!
A: Once again, as per the title this is only designed specifically for Seton's, so I couldn't care less.
Q: Will there be further changes in the future?
A: Most likely if through games significant issues are noted with the balance. But there will be no arbitrary changes, just minor adjustments. See upcoming ideas and changes for details.
Q: I don't agree with a change! What should I do?
A: Make a point with maths/calculations to support your point or I will ignore it. 'I am not good at playing the game/using certain units' is not a valid reason for me to consider changing something. This mod is designed to maximise high level gameplay only.
Q: Wow galactic, x change is really good, we were really dumb not to implement this years ago in the main balance! Can we?
A: Yes you were. Feel free to implement anything in the main balance if you think it is a good idea.
Q: Don't you think there are too many changes too fast, like you often complain about? Isn't that hypocritical?
A: Yes to some extent, but most of these are changes I have thought about for years, and after this initial stage any further changes will be minor. This big initial change is to kick start the gameplay in direction it should be rather than waste any more time.
Q: Hey gala, can you explain xyz?
A: Only if you have read this post first and the question isn't already answered. I am not interested in the majority playing this mod, just high level Seton's players sorry.
Q: Don't you think you made too many changes without testing them properly one at a time?
A: Maybe but I have a deep understanding of the game (based on numbers) in these aspects so I expect mistakes to be minimal. However I anticipate further small tweaks after some games.
Q: Gala, I am a non-Seton's player and wasted my life reading this entire post, can I have a refund?
A: No.
Q: Why did you balance only around Seton's?
A: Again, I still don't care.
A: If you don't play Seton's this doesn't apply to you, and you wasted your own time reading this, good job.
Q: How did you decide these changes?
A: All changes are from my years of Seton's experience and changing balance dynamics, so I generally know which aspects of the balance have worked best. My philosophy is that everything that has changed has clear rationale and to be intuitive. I want fluid, dynamic gameplay with multiple potential strategies at all stages of the game.
Q: What is the purpose of this mod?
A: To reach peak Seton's gameplay and address many clear issues that have been ignored for years that I got bored of not being fixed.
Q: Wtf gala, this is shit balance for playing *insert generic team map*!
A: Once again, as per the title this is only designed specifically for Seton's, so I couldn't care less.
Q: Will there be further changes in the future?
A: Most likely if through games significant issues are noted with the balance. But there will be no arbitrary changes, just minor adjustments. See upcoming ideas and changes for details.
Q: I don't agree with a change! What should I do?
A: Make a point with maths/calculations to support your point or I will ignore it. 'I am not good at playing the game/using certain units' is not a valid reason for me to consider changing something. This mod is designed to maximise high level gameplay only.
Q: Wow galactic, x change is really good, we were really dumb not to implement this years ago in the main balance! Can we?
A: Yes you were. Feel free to implement anything in the main balance if you think it is a good idea.
Q: Don't you think there are too many changes too fast, like you often complain about? Isn't that hypocritical?
A: Yes to some extent, but most of these are changes I have thought about for years, and after this initial stage any further changes will be minor. This big initial change is to kick start the gameplay in direction it should be rather than waste any more time.
Q: Hey gala, can you explain xyz?
A: Only if you have read this post first and the question isn't already answered. I am not interested in the majority playing this mod, just high level Seton's players sorry.
Q: Don't you think you made too many changes without testing them properly one at a time?
A: Maybe but I have a deep understanding of the game (based on numbers) in these aspects so I expect mistakes to be minimal. However I anticipate further small tweaks after some games.
Q: Gala, I am a non-Seton's player and wasted my life reading this entire post, can I have a refund?
A: No.
Q: Why did you balance only around Seton's?
A: Again, I still don't care.
Finally, credit goes to Evildrew for making the first version, Blackheart for expanding upon it and giving me inspiration, and EQ/Exotic Retard in particular for his help. Also a number of others helped with suggestions and ideas which I appreciated.
And I have left in many of the "good" changes of recent patches, and probably a few more once I review changes since 3650 in detail.
